ask-the-hatbox-ghost asked: …so it feels unlikely you'd know anything about it, but since you're in charge of the other current Duck animation, and like the 3 Caballeros… okay, do you know ANYTHING about "Legend of the Three Caballeros"? Where does it come from? Why is it not anywhere online? Is it all a hoax or what?
I’ve seen an episode of it, but know very little about it. It was made before we started on DuckTales by a group outside of Disney TVA, possibly meant to be more educational than entertainment-based? It feels sort of like an alternate universe rooted more in the old Donald shorts than anything Barks-related- there’s no sign of Scrooge, the nephews, Gyro, Duckburg, lots of humans everywhere, etc., with April, May, and June standing in for the kid protagonists. I think Tony mentioned they made a bunch of them, but I don’t know how or when or for what platform.
Ultimately it was done before we ever started up on our show, so it had no baring on us postponing our Three Cabs episode idea- that was more of a production concern than anything else. Would still love to have Panchito and Jose on the show. Maybe some day…
A mysterious Three Caballeros show has appeared on the DisneyLife app It’s called The Legend Of The Three Caballeros and it has 13 episodes running for 22 mins each Will This show see the light on US? Will it be for 2019 Disney’s Streaming Service I Guess Time Will Tell Produced At Disney TVA
sorry for waiting so long to reblog this but I wanted to be SURE IT’S LEGIT
panchi-the-dork asked: Have you heard about the Three Caballeros Series called "The legend of the three Caballeros"?
I HAVE BUT I’M HESITANT TO CELEBRATE BEFORE BEING 1000% SURE IT’S REAL because if it isn’t I will cry but on the other hand if it’s legit??? why??? have I not heard ANYTHING about this before now I W AN T IT
Anonymous asked: okay now I'm worried that we are all going to cry an awful lot with this next duck comic you got in the works bc you said in the tags that the next doodle comic 'is a doozy' and the last couple of stories have been cute and funny and I KNOW YOU MOD. I KNOW YOU.
If you’re European, in a couple of weeks you will be denied any and all access to fandom contents on Tumblr and everywhere else on the internet. Here’s why.
On June, 20th the JURI of European Parliament approved of the articles 11 and 13 of the new Copyright Law. These articles are also known as the “Link Tax” and the “Censorship Machines” articles.
Articles 13 in particular forces every internet platform to filter all the contents we upload online, ending once and for all the fandom culture. Which means you won’t be able to upload any type of fandom works like fan arts, fan fictions, gif sets from your favourite films and series, edits, because it’s all copyrighted material. And you won’t also be able to share, enjoy or download other’s contents, because the use of links will be completely restricted.
But not everything’s lost yet. There’s another round of voting scheduled for the early days of July.
What you can do now to save our internet, is to share these informations with all of your family members and friends, and to ask to your MEP (the members of the European Parliament from your country) to vote NO at the next round, to vote against articles 11 and 13.
Here you can find more news and all the details to contact your MEP:
We have just a couple of weeks to stop this complete madness, don’t let them dictating the way we enjoy our internet.
#SaveYourInternet now!
It’s funny how y'all will reblog any and all US things but when whole Europe might lose access to internet then everything is quiet.
Hey, guys! It’s me, your friendly neighborhood law student!
I am seeing this circling my dashboard (yet again) and I would like to say a few things about it. Once again, as I have stated before when I’ve weighed in on something, I am not a lawyer (yet). But, that being said…
Please stop being sensationalist. There are many legitimate criticisms of this directive, but these are not the criticisms I am seeing being spread around. Instead, what’s being spread around amounts to fearmongering. I don’t blame you for doing so - the vast majority of this is being started by the people this will hit hardest, AKA big corporate giants such as Google, Amazon and Microsoft. They have the kind of press pull that very easily leads to this kind of panic.
So, for any of my followers having anxiety about this, let me soothe your worries and address them point by point.
1. “This will destroy the internet in two weeks”
No, no, it won’t. This is a directive, meaning (unlike, say, the the last thing to bring my work onto my tumblr, the fucking GDPR) that it leaves the goals of the directive open to somewhat free implementation by member states, as long as the basic goals of the directive are met on time. As such, it will be years before we actually see any binding legislation as a result of this directive, and how member states choose to implement it will vary on the state in question.
2. “Article 11 will completely restrict the use of links”
Article 11, AKA what is being referred to as the link tax, essentially implements what we call the ancillary copyright of press publishers. This right gives press publishers the right to demand compensation when snippets of their content are displayed on other web pages. So, essentially, this is an article almost directly designed to bop Google (who currently holds the kind of leading market position that the EU sees as incrediblyproblematic because it kind of goes against everything the EU stands for) on the nose. This would force Google (and, with it, other companies) to compensate the writers of articles that are mirrored to their sites in a truncated form, often leading to less traffic to the actual site in question and thus the mirroring site gaining the revenue that would otherwise be due to the writer of the article.
Now - there are legitimate criticisms of this, which mostly hinge on the fact that forcing people to pay the content creator for content they are using may lead some people to stop using that content. Personally, I think it’s better for people to receive compensation for their work, even if it comes at the cost of less sharing of the work. You are allowed to disagree. The most legitimate form of criticism of this article, in my humble opinion, is that it may lead to a picking and choosing of what content to share and what not to. The thing is - is this not something that is being done already? What does this article add to that other than to make sure that if you do choose to share someone else’s work, that other party gets compensated accordingly?
3. “Article 13 will destroy fandom culture”
No, no, it won’t. The vast majority of fandom culture falls under what US law refers to as fair use and most European national laws (which, in the case of EU countries, are harmonized according to the European Union Copyright Directive) refer to as private use. Article 13 in and of itself does not change the allowances made for private use of media in derivative works already. It merely mandates that companies must take effective measures to stop the users of their services from sharing media that infringes on copyright.
Again, I am in the boring camp of agreeing with the EU - I believe it is better for people to be compensated for their work. If the way we are currently using media in fandom is infringing on copyright, then I think we should stop using it that way. You are entirely welcome to disagree with me on this. Notice how the wording of the article constantly emphasizes how measures taken must be appropriate and proportionate. How the the content recognition technology is mentioned as an example of effective measures that could be taken to stop the uploading and sharing of copyrighted works, not as the only way of doing so. Notice how the entire third paragraph of this article deals with best practices and appropriate and proportionate technology which takes into account the availability and effectiveness of technology - so, essentially, if it sucks and flags too many things as infringing on copyright, it should not be used because it is not appropriate, proportionate or effective. And that’s right there in the directive.
And, yet again, there are legitimate criticisms of this article, including the one mentioned in the OP I am replying to regarding the limitations of sharing copyrighted material on, say, Youtube. That’s true - but you haven’t been allowed to upload full films onto Youtube as is, have you? Videos with copyrighted music in the background have been muted or deleted, as well. The most legitimate criticism I’ve seen is that these automatic copyright infringement flagging algorithms are generally overzealous, and this could lead to over-censoring of content that would actually fall under fair use/personal use/whatever you want to call it. That’s true, very true - but the article doesn’t require countries to enforce algorithms being used if they don’t work as they should. See above paragraph.
So, in conclusion: yes, this directive could stand to be worded better. Yes, it may technically lead to the kinds of doomsday scenarios people are imagining - but I really don’t think it will. In fact, I doubt you’ll notice much difference when (in a few years) these laws actually start getting implemented. Notice how no one has heard about the GDPR for like three weeks now, even though we’re living in that supposedly apocalyptic post-GDPR world? (I say, bitterly, as I wade through piles of GDPR every day at work… :D)
Still don’t like the directive proposal? That’s totally fine. By all means, call up your MEP, take a stand! Now, you’re doing it for the right reasons.
Anonymous asked: hey mod! just letting you know about the possible other side of article 13. while the new law certainly doesnt protect fan creation and the like, it was designed to help censor extreme fake news sources. outcry about it was spread by alt right leaning youtubers. im not saying theres no cause for concern, but at least this law isnt being made in the same vein as net neutrality.
I know, and that’s the heart breaking part because I want to help protect creators and their content (and stop rampant fake news sources)- but the thing being proposed is like using a hammer to crack a nut, and there’s too many gaps that could allow it to be misused by large corporations. This is the last thing I’ll post about this because I’m giving myself and all of you a headache with it, but I hope you understand and if I’m wrong I’ll come back and delete all these- I just feel strongly about censorship and I don’t want to risk losing something that’s so important for allowing people to connect with each other and create laughter together.
thefloatingstone asked: Sorry Mod. That post you just reblogged IS for a pretty shitty thing... but that post in particular is a LOT of fear mongering and largely false. Fanart does not fall under copyright law. I recommend checking its tags as there have been lawyer tumblr posts explaining the truth of the matter. It sucks, but is not as extremist as that post leads to believe.
yes and no- the problem is that this impending issue isn’t getting enough attention because the guy who originally posted that video (you know that one with the orange haired dude) was an anti EU guy with some severely right-wing views. Which effectively killed everyone’s interest, which sucks because regardless of how he put it this is still a big thing that needs addressing. Like Net Neutrality, this is an issue that has global implications. I’m definitely not condoning fear mongering, and I do wish there was a post that was less panic inducing, but the fact is almost nobody is talking about this. I didn’t even know about it until two weeks ago and I live in Europe! I took this long to reblog a post about it because I wanted to find out more and that post actually has links that hold merit. It’s not so much that all things fandom related will definitely be banned, it’s the fact that this law is so vaguely phrased that it could be used to do that, and will likely be enacted by automatic filters (like the ones youtube has been using and people have been having trouble with for ages).
So yeah, it’s bad! There are over-reactions all over the place, but that doesn’t remove the fact that this is not? Good? I don’t like not saying things about things that are not good. Please help us do something about it.
